Tag Archive - Calvinism

The Frank Page Peace Committee

August 17, 2012 in Calvinism, SBC with 25 Comments

A lot of folks in the SBC who have been paying attention to the long-standing Calvinism debate have been anticipating the formation of the Page Peace Committee. Dr. Frank Page, president of the Executive Committee of the SBC, announced earlier this year that he was planning to form a “consensus accord”. In May, he explained:

“Given the depth of the fracture lines around the issue of soteriology across the Convention, I sense a need to assemble a representative group of Southern Baptists who can hammer out such a consensus ‘accord’ that will enable the majority of Southern Baptists to work together for the Kingdom purposes which initially bound us together, an initiative I plan to announce at this year’s annual meeting.” (emphasis mine)

Sounds like a great idea. When I heard this, I too went to the SBC Annual Meeting with high hopes and encouraged my Calvinist brethren to work for a Great Commission consensus. While the battle lines had already been drawn, several months prior to the annual meeting, the largely anti-Calvinist crowd had loaded ammunition, so it seemed, and fired away with dozens of blogposts up until the week when we came together. By the time we met in New Orleans, it became clear that the messengers of the SBC had no desire to continue the bickering and infighting, soundly rejecting any attempt by motion or resolution to continue the blustering actions of a few on the blogosphere. Page was one of several voices setting the tone of the convention hall, as the Baptist Press liveblog recounted:

Executive Committee President Frank Page delivered the EC’s second report. Page addressed the issue of Calvinism, saying, “Calvinism is an issue amongst us.” He added, “I’m not a Calvinist … but a lot of our people are.” Page said he is concerned that there are some non-Calvinists who are more concerned about rooting out Calvinists than they are about winning lost to Christ. On the flip side, Page said he is concerned about Calvinists who view those who disagree with them as unintelligent. He referenced the panel that will “chart a way” forward for both sides, but Page did not announce any members of the panel. The two sides of the issue have walked arm in arm for the Great Commission for years, Page said, and should continue to do so. (emphasis mine, see also the BP story on Page’s address)

The big takeaway from New Orleans was to be the developments of Dr. Page’s “peace committee” (or advisory group) and what exactly this new group would seek to accomplish. Yesterday, the names and intentions of this group was announced through Baptist Press. The purpose of the group, according to Dr. Page is:

Continue Reading…

Reformed Theology and John 3:16

July 6, 2012 in Calvinism with 17 Comments

Earlier today, I came across the video below through a tweet by Voddie Baucham. John 3:16 is used, especially in the SBC circles, to be a soteriological line of demarcation by non-Calvinists to distinguish what they believe about salvation as opposed to Calvinism.  It is assumed that Reformed theology cannot possibly assent to the theology inherent to John 3:16, such as a “whosoever will” gospel proclamation, God’s unconditional love for all mankind without exception, and definite possibility that anyone anywhere can be saved, should they exercise their own free will to choose (in a libertarian sense of indeterminism). In fact, conferences and books have recently been published in polemic fashion to make such a case. If it was possible to lay claim to one verse and subscribe one’s interpretation a measure of infallibility, it appears John 3:16 would be the top of the list. Indeed, some perhaps believe it is the linchpin in the case against Reformed theology.

It goes without saying that perhaps no other verse has more “control beliefs” or presuppositions when coming to the text than this verse. Therefore, the challenge to let the text speak for itself requires all the more “distanciation” – something we all struggle with. Could it be possible that more is going on in our understanding of a text than what the text is actually saying? Invariably to some degree, this is the case, which means that we should be all the more dogged to derive our conclusions based on rigorous exegesis (including contextual considerations) through a humble submission to God’s authoritative Word. Furthermore, I believe doing “theology-in-community” is a necessary hermeneutical filter and means of grace as we recognize no one of us is the sole arbiter of truth. In some sense, blogging can serve that purpose, as we all seek to know and rightly divide the Word of Truth. Unfortunately, we struggle to get to that point as heat eclipses the potential light that might arise from such an occasion.

In any case, I watched this video and was encouraged by what I saw. I don’t know this fella, and I am not familiar with his website. I am posting the video on the sole merits of his arguments, which I think are biblically plausible and exegetically sound. There’s much more that could be said about John 3:16 (as he shares in the end), but for the time he devoted to the subject, I thought it was a good explanation. I’d like to hear your thoughts on this and perhaps have a profitable discussion over the weekend, should that develop in the comments section.

Jerry Rankin, Illusion of Unity, and Empty Rhetoric

July 3, 2012 in Calvinism, SBC with 3 Comments

Jerry Rankin, former President of the International Mission Board (IMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) recently wrote about the perceived unity in the SBC. I think he expresses a legitimate concern for those of us wanting to genuinely cooperate together despite doctrinal differences. Rankin wrote:

The updated Baptist Faith and Message 2000 would supposedly be the definitive statement of faith around which all Southern Baptists could unite. But apparently that is not sufficient. It is not enough to subscribe to the BF&M; if you do not interpret soteriology as I do your doctrine is not only suspect, it is dangerous to the SBC. There have been motions at recent conventions implying calvinists need to be ostracized from the convention.

There is little to commend unity among cookie-cutter conformists. Unity is significant only in the context of diversity. We are a diverse denomination ethnically, generationally, and in church size and forms. And, yes, there are variations in how Baptists understand and interpret matters of faith while holding to the same common foundational doctrines.

Why is unity an illusion? Because there are those who don’t really want unity; they want conformity to their way of thinking. We have an unfortunate record of alienating those who don’t agree with us, no matter how trivial the differences in our viewpoints. Some will remember as the conservative resurgence gained traction a number of moderate leaders drafted proposals for reconciliation for working together. Sadly, they did not realize no one was interested in conciliatory outcomes. The movement gained control by marginalizing and pushing out the moderates. Some would insist the same strategy is needed to produce the pretense of unity around an even narrower perspective of doctrine and ecclesiology today. (emphasis mine)

As for the former head of the largest missions sending agency in the world, Rankin knows the potential impact such narrowing conformity might bring on a Great Commission Resurgence. Indeed, he could speak firsthand of the number of missionaries who are confessionally Reformed and serving among the least reached and hardest places of the world. Nearly ever missionary I know serving with the IMB would be marginalized in the SBC if some, demanding conformity to their narrowing of parameters (or beyond the BF&M), would win the day in the SBC.

Fortunately, I believe there’s a new majority forming in the SBC intolerant of the attempts of a few (mostly online efforts) to, as Rankin puts it, ostracize Calvinists from meaningful cooperation around the Great Commission and confessional consensus (BF&M). He is right to assert that unity is significant in the context of diversity, and within the BF&M, there is allowed for a various theological convictions while at the same time acknowledging there is much upon which we can agree and work together. Here’s to hoping for significant unity through a shared commitment to stand on the inerrant Word, preach the unadulterated gospel, and love the lost for the sake of Christ and His glory.

The One Point of Calvinistic Soteriology

July 1, 2012 in Calvinism with 6 Comments

J.I. Packer, in his introduction to John Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, makes the following argument about the “one point of Calvinistic soteriology” – namely the conviction that God saves sinners.

For to Calvinism there is really only one point to be made in the field of soteriology: the point that God saves sinners. God—the Triune Jehovah, Father, Son and Spirit; three Persons working together in sovereign wisdom, power and love to achieve the salvation of a chosen people, the Father electing, the Son fulfilling the Father’s will by redeeming, the Spirit executing the purpose of Father and Son by renewing. Saves—does everything, first to last, that is involved in bringing man from death in sin to life in glory: plans, achieves and communicates redemption, calls and keeps, justifies, sanctifies, glorifies. Sinners—men as God finds them, guilty, vile, helpless, powerless, unable to lift a finger to do God’s will or better their spiritual lot. God saves sinners—and the force of this confession may not be weakened by disrupting the unity of the work of the Trinity, or by dividing the achievement of salvation between God and man and making the decisive part man’s own, or by soft-pedaling the sinner’s inability so as to allow him to share the praise of his salvation with his Saviour. This is the one point of Calvinistic soteriology which the “five points” are concerned to establish and Arminianism in all its forms to deny: namely, that sinners do not save themselves in any sense at all, but that salvation, first and last, whole and entire, past, present and future, is of the Lord, to whom be glory for ever; amen.

Subscribe to Provocations & Pantings | Contact Timmy Brister

Dr. Nettles on the Chiastic Structure of SBC History

June 24, 2012 in Calvinism, SBC with 0 Comments

Dr. Tom Nettles was the speaker last week at the 2012 Founders Breakfast (at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the SBC). The title of his message is “The Southern Baptist Convention: Retrospect and Prospect” and I highly recommend it, especially in light of the current discussions about “traditional” theology in the SBC. The first half of Nettles’ provides numerous facts, figures, and direct references to pastors, churches, and institutions who held Reformed doctrine prior to the new traditionalists, while the second half focuses on the chiastic structure of SBC history. It is a fascinating look at the ebb and flow of theological trajectories, and the last nine minutes of the talk gives you Nettles’ direct interaction with the current attempt to marginalize Calvinists in the SBC.

To listen or download the audio, click here.
Also, be sure to check out the new book, Whomever He Wills, edited by Dr. Nettles and Matthew Barrett.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Three Positive Points Regarding SBC 2012

June 21, 2012 in Calvinism, SBC with 3 Comments

I used to blog about the Southern Baptist Convention quite a bit. In recent years, I have tried to focus on practical issues of church life from a theologically driven focus. Nevertheless, given the significance of this past week, I’d like to jump into the SBC blog world again and attempt to contribute a few reflections and anticipations.

NEW LEADERSHIP

I am very glad that the election of Fred Luter as the first African American President of the SBC was not overshadowed by the theological controversies swirling around on the internet. The moment when we all stood in affirmation and celebration of his election was a powerful moment. I don’t know how anyone could have not been emotional gripped by providence and the present recognition of history being made. As I type this in my NOLA hotel room, my wife and I just returned from a tour of the city.  One of the significant and recurring points the guide made was the slave quarters and how they lived in this city. Learning how prominent slavery was in the history of this city (and our country) makes me all the more appreciative of God’s work of repentance in the SBC.

Along with Luter as President, I am very encouraged by the election of Nathan Lino as First VP and Dave Miller as Second VP. Over the past four years, I have been a part of a “young leaders” meeting where, in 2008, I first met Nathan. He is an experienced church planter, whose church just celebrated their 10th anniversary. Nathan has a wonderful, gracious spirit and evangelical commitment to work together with Southern Baptists who may not agree with him on various theological issues but nevertheless are unified in the gospel and the Great Commission. Nathan and I have discussed this week how we can work together to forward a new narrative of healthy, robust discussion as brothers who see differently on various issues but have a transcendent love and determination to not allow the differences keep us from linking arms and hearts for reaching the lost, whether they are across the street or across the world. Hopefully, you will hear more about that in the future.

Continue Reading…

A Word to My Reformed Brothers in the SBC

June 15, 2012 in Calvinism, SBC with 14 Comments

When the current controversy erupted over Calvinism in the SBC erupted a couple weeks ago, I debated whether or not to enter the fray. Things have changed quite considerably since the hay day of 2005-2008 when Calvinism seemed to be the death-defying whipping boy of folks with more fight in their hands than love in their hearts. But alas, perhaps the change was merely an intermission thanks largely in part to the Great Commission Resurgence (GCR) which, for a time, seemed to unite Southern Baptists on the front lines of the Great Commission.

But the SBC, since the affirmation of the GCR, have gone back to the barricks and once again are turning against one another as if the willingness to fight is a temptation of which one too many are unwilling to walk away. Needless to say, I have my thoughts on the “traditionalist” March to New Orleans, and undoubtedly sparks are going to fly about Calvinism and whether or not the Baptist Faith and Message is a sufficient confessional guide to afford meaningful and substantive cooperation for Southern Baptists. Several of my friends have taken up this discussion on the Internet, including Tom Ascol (whose series I high recommend) and Nathan Finn (whose aspirations I wholeheartedly embrace). I don’t think I have much to contribute other than what they (and others) have been able to say in ways far more reasonable and eloquent.

BUT, if I have one contribution to make to the discussion leading up to next week’s Annual Meeting of the SBC in New Orleans, it would not be critiquing a very poorly written traditionalist document, nor would it be explaining the postmodern power play of subject-defining labels like “New Calvinism” and “traditionalist”, nor would it be showing how the “majoritarian” party has failed to influence the direction of the SBC since 2006 (2006-07 Joshua Convergence; 2008-09 Baptist Identity Movement; 2010-2011 Anti-GCR Movement; 2012 Traditionalist Movement). Rather, I’d like to issue a statement to my fellow Reformed brothers in the SBC. With all that is going on next week, there’s some fundamental things that I’m preaching to myself and think it helpful to share with my Reformed brethren.  To put some order to my thoughts, here are five “Do’s” and “Don’ts” as it related to next week’s Annual Meeting.

Continue Reading…

Christian Hedonist Calvinism

January 4, 2012 in Calvinism with 3 Comments

I thought this post from John Piper was quite compelling and affection-stirring:

What would the doctrines of grace sound like if every limb in that tree were coursing with the sap of Augustinian delight. (that is, Christian Hedonism)?

Total depravity is not just badness, but blindness to God’s beauty and deadness to the deepest joy.

Unconditional election means that the completeness of our joy in Jesus was planned for us before we ever existed as the overflow of God’s joy in the fellowship of the Trinity.

Limited atonement is the assurance that indestructible joy in God is infallibly secured for us by the blood of the covenant.

Irresistible grace is the commitment and power of God’s love to make sure we don’t hold on to suicidal pleasures, and to set us free by the sovereign power of superior delights.

Perseverance of the saints is the almighty work of God not to let us fall into the final bondage of inferior pleasures, but to keep us, through all affliction and suffering, for an inheritance of fullness of joy in his presence and pleasures at his right hand forevermore.

John Piper, Rick Warren, and the Purpose Driven Life

May 27, 2011 in Calvinism, evangelicalism, Gospel, Heaven, Hell, Interviews with 13 Comments

Let’s just pretend for a moment you did not read the title of this blogpost.  Let’s pretend that there was an anonymous Christian minister who explicitly affirmed the following:

I am passionate about the glory of God above all things.
I believe in the absolute sovereignty of God in all things, including sin and tragedy.
I believe in exhaustive, meticulous divine providence.
I believe in the doctrines of grace, including total depravity, unconditional election, and particular redemption.
I affirm the five solas of the reformation and consider myself a monergist both in justification and sanctification of the believer.
I believe in the eternal, conscious torment in a literal hell.
I believe that substitutionary atonement is at the heart of the gospel.
I believe in that the imputed righteousness of Christ is essential to the nature of the gospel.
I believe that God saves us from Himself by sending us His Son as the wrath-bearing propitiation in my place.
I believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God.
I believe that those who die never hearing the name of Christ will not go to heaven.  They need to hear the gospel, and the church must go to them and make Christ known in order for them to be saved.
Everything I do in life and ministry has an overarching missionary focus.

Having considered these personal beliefs and affirmations, what well-known evangelical preacher might we be talking about?  John MacArthur? Sounds a lot like him. Albert Mohler? Possibly. D.A. Carson? Perhaps.

Who is it that made these personal affirmations?

Rick Warren.

If you don’t believe me, watch and listen for yourself.

Like just about every other evangelical leader I respect, I don’t agree with everything Rick Warren says and does, but I found this interview very clarifying and confirming.  I cannot imagine the controversy and criticism both John Piper and Rick Warren will receive from this interview, but I’m grateful they made this agreement, having demonstrated a substantive, constructive, engagement on important issues from two very different perspectives.

I don’t know of two pastors in our country who have more influence on my generation than John Piper and Rick Warren.  They have asked that we pray for them, especially in regards to pursuing humility, fighting pride, and stewarding their influence for generations to come.  God has given these men incredible platforms to display the glory of God in the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Let’s pray for them and their continued usefulness in such enormous proportions for the advancement of the gospel both in breadth and depth for many years to come.

Amen.

Funnies for Friday

December 10, 2010 in Miscellanies with 0 Comments

Here are three videos that I enjoyed watching this week.  The C.J. Mahaney impersonation is amazing. The Calvinist pick-up lines are cheesy yet fun. The Michael Bird interview is a great reminder that scholars can have a great sense of humor (HT Trevin Wax).  Enjoy!

Page 1 of 612345»...Last »